Re: Question regarding OpenSSL 1.1.1b package configuration against OpenSSL 1.0.2r

[Steven Penny <svnpenn at gmail dot com>]

On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:25:48, Brian Inglis wrote:
> I am encouraging and offering the poster a way to solve their problem, after
> providing some possible reasons for dropping support from some ECs.
> Rebuilding a Cygwin package from source using cygport is a relatively easy
> task.

Easy compared to what, assembly? I am comfortable with 3 programming languages,
and learning 4 others, and compiling C is not "relatively easy". Especially
considering the scope:

   $ cd openssl-master
   $ find -name '*.c' -exec wc -l {} + | tail -1
   419738 total

400,000 lines of C.

> I am not presuming, but assuming some amount of technical expertise, based on
> a poster asking about openssl configuration and which ECs they want to
> support. If they need more help they can ask in a follow up.

reread the post:

https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2019-06/msg00012.html

He shows some domain knowledge of OpenSSL, but where are you getting that he
knows about compiling C? A conservative read would reveal that he might have no
knowledge of compiling C, and you want him to compile 400,000 lines of C because
its "easy".

> Please refrain from your own inappropriate assumptions and meta-commentary
> based on that, as this is not a social media platform.

No, but it is a public forum. and I will call out nonsense if I see it. As your
type of comments are off putting to new users.

> Why would you assume the poster is a novice? Before commenting, please try
> yourself to consider multiple perspectives on posts and replies?

As should you.


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple